What civ would you want in as the dark horse

[chaosenator]

nope the dark house will be pakistan lol

 

[Biologist]

For a serious submission:

The Seminoles, with Osceola as their leader.

 

[Nyanko]

For a serious submission:

The Seminoles, with Osceola as their leader.

For those like me who didn't know, they seem to be a Native American tribe originating in Florida.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seminole

 

[aarondhknight]

Israel or Inuit.

 

[steveg700]

For a serious submission:

The Seminoles, with Osceola as their leader.

For those like me who didn't know, they seem to be a Native American tribe originating in Florida.

So they're only partially Noles? Where do the full-blooded Nole people live?

 

[Civciv5]

I hope that it's the Khmer. We will most likely get Indonesia if they have listened to our fanbase.
Most people expect Vietnam, and while I support ANY Southeast Asian civ, I think The Khmer are second to Indonesia in greatest (not size) empire in Southeast Asia according to me. They built Angkor Wat, a true world wonder and many other temples ("greater than any those left of Greece and Rome"), Angkor was the largest city in the world, they had one of the largest empires in Southeast Asia. Their achievements are many and I hope they will once more be represented. Burma and Vietnam are possible too, but they are my second choice after the Khmer.

 

[sukritact]

I hope that it's the Khmer. We will most likely get Indonesia if they have listened to our fanbase.
Most people expect Vietnam, and while I support ANY Southeast Asian civ, I think The Khmer are second to Indonesia in greatest (not size) empire in Southeast Asia according to me. They built Angkor Wat, a true world wonder and many other temples ("greater than any those left of Greece and Rome"), Angkor was the largest city in the world, they had one of the largest empires in Southeast Asia. Their achievements are many and I hope they will once more be represented. Burma and Vietnam are possible too, but they are my second choice after the Khmer.

People equate/confuse the Khmer with Siam too much for the Khmer to stand much of a chance (Those Khmer statues! I will never stop ranting about them!).

Personally, I'd like to see the Khmer, but would rather see the Majapahit/Indonesia.

 

[blackcatatonic]

^ I agree with this. I don't see a place for the Khmer next to Siam, unfortunately.

Majapahit or Indonesia (personally I most expect a Civ based on Majapahit-era culture but actually called Indonesia) would be my number one choice. I think they are long overdue; furthermore, they would work very well with the expansion's new mechanics.

I don't know why people seem to be suggesting that Vietnam are more likely to be added. They too would be worthy additions but honestly I think Indonesia are more deserving (and would be more fun to play). The 'more people have heard of Vietnam because of the war' argument is just silly to me.

 

[sukritact]

If Vietnam is in I just hope the only reference to the Vietnam War is a UU. Anything else would be making Vietnam "Western-centric".

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

So they're only partially Noles? Where do the full-blooded Nole people live?

At the Poles (they're voles, and live in holes)

 

[Dragonflow]

If Vietnam is in I just hope the only reference to the Vietnam War is a UU. Anything else would be making Vietnam "Western-centric".

I don't think there is much more they could do related to the Vietnam War other then the UU. They can't pick Uncle Ho as a leader, since that would make Vietnamese Americans mad and a defensive UA doesn't necessarily has anything to do with the Vietnam War.

 

[vcutag]

Since we're going for dark horse here, I'd say the Manchu/Jurchen under Nurhaci.

 

[Louis XXIV]

If Vietnam is in I just hope the only reference to the Vietnam War is a UU. Anything else would be making Vietnam "Western-centric".

That's my hope. A leader from a different period of Vietnamese history and a building or unit to reflect that, but a modern UU that replaces Infantry (for example). Either Viet Cong or simply Guerrilla would work well.

 

[Biologist]

For those like me who didn't know, they seem to be a Native American tribe originating in Florida.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seminole

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[iconocast]

A little difficult as they were never a cohesive civ in the traditional sense and they have Pueblo like issues with the depiction of the dead. Picking a leader and UU or UA's could be problematic. I wouldn't complain if they were selected as they fill a part of the map sadly neglected but the design is inherently tricky. They had a unique culture but not in the sense that Civ uses the word and the concept of cities was alien to them.

Australia makes a tad more sense in the same way Brazil makes sense over any of the Amazon tribes. Great unique and interesting cultures but not really conducive to a world building game like this one.

I'd be happy to see Sth Africa instead of the Zulu but use the Zulu Impi as a UU merely because it fits better with the way that History played out. That said I love me some Zulu in terms of gameplay.

The Moors has always seemed a strange omission to me because they of all African civs had the most effect on Europe when they took most of Spain as well as Sicily. Nth West Africa has little representation in the game (Carthage had some control over parts of that coast).

Indonesia/Majapahit seem a no brainer in a trade expansion.

Argentina doesn't fill up the map as much as Brazil or Australia but again are a pretty significant omission. Had this been developed after the recent Papal vote they may have got that extra push too.

Kongo or Great Zimbabwe have good cases for inclusion especially given the scramble for Africa.

The Timurid fills an empty area in Central Asia.

the Australian aboriginals would be an amazing cultural civ, sure they where nomads mostly but so is attila and hes in

and the fact brazil got in makes me think theres not much reason ( logicly) to not include aus. but tbh i would rather see the aboriginals instead

 

[PhilBowles]

People equate/confuse the Khmer with Siam too much for the Khmer to stand much of a chance (Those Khmer statues! I will never stop ranting about them!).

In fairness, not only did the "Siamese" of the period represented in Civ V emerge in areas then held by the Khmer (the name "Siamese" itself is anachronistic, as this name derived from Siam, itself a French derivative of the Chinese word for the later capital Ayutthaya, in a very different part of modern Thailand), later Siamese leaders both continued the same architectural tradition and, later, consciously emulated Khmer architecture. I've never visited Sukothai, so don't know if this is the case in the area of northern Thailand the game represents, but it's very clear in the design of many of the monuments at Ayutthaya. Even Wat Chaiwatthanarum, though Siamese rather than Khmer in design, deliberately adopts a layout that imitates Angkor Wat (probably directly, rather than simply referencing the same mythic view of the world, as this was well into the Buddhist period).

Personally, I'd like to see the Khmer, but would rather see the Majapahit/Indonesia.

I want to see the Khmer back, and I've had ideas in the past for making them distinct from the Siamese, but I expect to see them as DLC, if at all, rather than in the expansion. Aside from the possible issue of switching Korea's colours to accommodate them, they don't fit particularly well with any of the known expansion themes and all the existing Asian civs are ancient to medieval (despite a modern Indian leader in Gandhi, he gets a war chariot and a medieval fort) - I think they'll want a modern Asian civ, either early modern Majapahit, modern Indonesia, or modern Vietnam (though I'd rather have the Champa).

 

[magzhi]

Kazakhstan would be a nice addition, but I doubt that firaxis would ever bother adding it to the game.

 

[Dragonflow]

I want to see the Khmer back, and I've had ideas in the past for making them distinct from the Siamese, but I expect to see them as DLC, if at all, rather than in the expansion. Aside from the possible issue of switching Korea's colours to accommodate them, they don't fit particularly well with any of the known expansion themes and all the existing Asian civs are ancient to medieval (despite a modern Indian leader in Gandhi, he gets a war chariot and a medieval fort) - I think they'll want a modern Asian civ, either early modern Majapahit, modern Indonesia, or modern Vietnam (though I'd rather have the Champa).

Well, one could make the stretch and say that Khmer fit with ideology as Cambodia played a role in the Vietnam War and later Cold War struggles in the region.
Although I would loathe to see anything related to the Khmer Rouge in Civ and especially representing Cambodia.
Maybe they could fit in with the new culture/tourism theme as well.
Although I still suspect Vietnam to be our East-Asian civ.

 

[Inhalaattori]

the Australian aboriginals would be an amazing cultural civ, sure they where nomads mostly but so is attila and hes in and the fact brazil got in makes me think theres not much reason ( logicly) to not include aus. but tbh i would rather see the aboriginals instead

Australian aboriginals would be horrible civ, because they really didnt invent anything and they were extremely primitive. They were still living in the stone age when Europeans got to the Australia. What would their UU, UB and UA be? Im just keeping it 100% real. Im not saying their lifestyle was bad, but it doesnt make much sense to have them in the game, when they really didnt invent any of the techs in the games tech tree. Comparing Aboriginals to Huns is ridiculous. Huns were very advanced militarily. And in fact they had to be, because how else they would have won battles against the Romans?

 

[sukritact]

@PhilBowles:

There certainly is a relationship there, but is it ultimately worse than the similarities between China, Japan and Korea? Or Germany and Austria even...

Siam and the Khmer often just get lumped together because of the relatively negligible effects we had on Western Civilization. It's an exaggerated version of what sometimes happens to East Asia.

I'd say it'd be better to compare Khmer Architecture to something like the Wat Phra Kaew anyway, there's certainly enough difference for people not to confuse the two. Is it really fair to compare it to the ruins of Ayutthaya anyway? The city was mostly burnt down by the Burmese, there may have been other examples of architecture that just aren't there anymore...